"The road ahead will be long. Our climb will be steep," Obama cautioned. Young and charismatic but with little experience on the national level, Obama smashed through racial barriers and easily defeated ...
Full Story

<quoted text>The crisis started during the Clinton administration when Fannie and Freddie were "let loose" with very little oversight.The two budgets Obama proposed was rejected unanimously in the Senate by every single Democrat. If they had voted for even more spending, they might lose their comfy seats in the Senate.If the Senate refuses to even bring up any bills passed by the House, they become culpable of obstruction.But thanks for trying.

so the crisis started with Clinton and continued unabated for the 6 years Congress was ruled by Republicans.

what is it about that 6 years that just has to be ignored by FOXbots? please explain.

and....

Fox News host Megyn Kelly repeatedly pushed the false narrative that President Obama's 2013 budget proposal received zero votes in the Senate, which is controlled by Democrats. In reality, the Senate did not vote on Obama's real budget, but on shell legislation introduced by Republicans in order to "embarrass" Democrats.

Discussing current budget negotiations on America Live, Kelly claimed President Obama's budget proposal received zero votes when the Senate voted on it earlier this year. Kelly said, "The Democrats in the Senate didn't have the courage to pass it. What makes you think the Republicans would?" and concluded, "A proposal's meaningless unless you [have] support for it. He can't even get support from his own party."

Kelly's assertion is a deceptive revision of history. In May, the Senate did vote 99-0 against a nonbinding budget resolution, but this was not Obama's full budget. Instead, Republican Sen. Jeff Sessions introduced his own, much shorter version of Obama's plan, which included the same figures as Obama's plan for spending, revenue, and deficits, but none of his specific policy proposals. As ABC's Jake Tapper reported, "The Sessions legislation was 56 pages long; actual budgets are closer to 2,000 pages long."

Republicans then forced the Senate to vote on Sessions' version of Obama's plan to "embarrass Democrats and the White House," as the Associated Press put it.

In an effort to remove the hot-potato issue of excessive government spending from the 2012 presidential campaign, and calling the bluff of congressional Republicans who always seem to favor domestic spending cuts but increased military spending, President Obama suggested the concept of "sequester" in late 2011.His idea was to reduce the rate of increased spending by 2 percent across the board—on domestic and military spending. To his surprise, the Republicans went along with this. They did so either because they lacked the political fortitude and the political will to designate specifically the unconstitutional and pork barrel federal spending projects to be cut, or because they thought that with the debt of the federal government then approaching $15 trillion (it is now $16.6 trillion and growing), any reductions in spending money the government doesn't have are preferred to no reductions. So, instead of enacting a budget, and instead of recognizing that much of its spending is simply not authorized by the Constitution, Congress enacted the so-called sequester legislation, and the president signed it into law.The reductions the sequesters require are reductions in the rate of increased spending from those originally planned by Obama and authorized by Congress. Since the federal government has not had a budget in four years, even though federal law requires it to have one every year, these are planned expenditures, not budgetary items, on which the president wants to spend more money. Congress does not feel bound to obey the laws it has written; hence it has disregarded the legal requirement of a budget. Without a budget, the president has great leeway as to how to allocate funds within each department of the executive branch of the federal government.Nevertheless, even if these sequesters do kick in, the feds will spend more in 2013 than they spent in 2012. That's because the sequesters are not cuts to spending; rather, they are reductions in planned increases in spending. The reductions amount to about two cents for every planned dollar of increased spending for every federal department.The question remains: What part of each federal department (Justice, Defense, Homeland Security, Agriculture, etc.) will suffer these reduced increases? Here is where this sequester experiment gets dicey.The president—who once championed the idea of sequesters and even threatened to veto any congressional effort to dismantle them—now has decided he can't live without that additional 2 percent to spend. So, he has gone about the country trying to scare the daylights out of people: Prisoners will be released from federal prisons, soldiers won't have enough bullets in their weapons, we will need to endure five-hour waiting lines at the airports, Social Security checks will be late, and similar nonsense.

How Are The Liberals Re-writing History And Teaching Lies To Our Children?How can we know anything about anything? That's the real questiondiv>Liberals today are trying to change the history of America by leaving God out of it, but the truth is, God has been a part of this nation, since the beginning. He still wants to be.When I was in college, I started taking history classes thinking that I would surely see the hand of God in History. I never saw the hand of God in history the way that they presented history at the university. Years later, I did see many patterns in history, patterns that showed that God is working in the lives of men. The history that was taught in those college classrooms was scoured of any evidence of God, though. Even the great events of history such as the crusades have been distorted to give a false impression of what took place. The vision given to Christopher Columbus by God had already been carefully scrubbed from the history texts when I was a boy in the 1950s. One of the patterns in the crusades, the war against terror, the second world war and many other historical events seems to be that when anti-Christian leaders command their followers to attack the innocent, terrible things happen.Liberal minds have a problem when it comes to truth, because a true liberal doesn't believe in truth or lie, only in winning or losing. Bill Clinton brought it down to this: It depends what you mean when you say, "is." A liberal politician who got caught harassing a man who worked for him with repeated unwanted romantic advances said that each person must find his or her own reality. They used to be more subtle, but now we are hearing the bold claim that, "What actually happened makes no real difference." Liberals have a high respect for skilled liars. Liars who are not as smooth but not to the same high degree.At the same time that liberals will accept almost anything as "proof" of liberal principles, they will reject even the most compelling proof anything that is not liberal.Truth, from the standpoint of a liberal, has little meaning other than to that particular liberal. This is why liberals don't require any internal consistency of their politicians and heroes. Liberals Are Fine Without Truth. They are making up their morality as they go along."I am convinced that the battle for humankind's future must be waged and won in the public school classroom by teachers who correctly perceive their role as the proselytizers of a new faith: a religion of humanity that recognizes and respects the spark of what theologians call divinity in every human being. These teachers must embody the same selfless dedication as the most rabid fundamentalist preachers, for they will be ministers of another sort, utilizing a classroom instead of a pulpit to convey humanist values in whatever subject they teach, regardless of the educational level preschool day care or large state university." [SIC]

<quoted text>FloriDUH here is just too stupid to realize that the racism was in the SOUTH, not with a political party.But hey, what more should we expect from an uneducated, uninformed right whiner like FloriDUH?

ANyone would think after 200 years, they'd be over it already.

Someone read to them from the Roger Williams storybook of chattell slavery.

The Pequots should be standing in line in frunt of duh white house-telling dem nothing but whiney speshull entitleMental slackertic seekers, get the hell to the back uf duh line--they was here first and have the REAL rightful dibs on demanding THREE hundred year old reparations.

<quoted text>And STILL, pointy tin foil hat Duh Avey...'Merica has NO actual buhdget.Lotsa ppl think just "spending" is a BuhDUHget these days-and therefore-they just suck at that kind of stuff. Kinda like what this nation has been dealing with for the past four plus years now.Better hid yer little silver monopoly shoe, or duh bill cowector and/or vultures of gweed and no-constraint, will be making yew sellz it!!

<quoted text>The 55% are still holding out for free stuff and like being controlled.In this economy that this president doesn't seem to have on his "to-do" list to fix, who can blame them?When Obamacare kicks in next year and more money is taken out of the already diminishing take-home pay of those fortunate enough to still have jobs and the 55% find out free medical care isn't all it was cracked up to be, that number will change very quickly.

They say California is the Trend Setter… California Weighs Redefining Who Qualifies as a 'Doctor' to Cope with Obamacare's Shortages, Florida follows!! Donna Brazile ‘why did my Health Care premiums go up!’Liberals today complaining about Voter Suppression just think when Obamacare is fully implemented in 2014; Liberals will be in the Streets complaining about the like of access to Doctors blaming Republicans for another Fail Liberal Idea!!

“This is the president’s budget,” said the top Democrat on the Senate Budget Committee, Sen. Kent Conrad of South Dakota, indicating the voluminous budget proposal President Obama offered.“This is what Sen. Sessions has presented as being the president’s budget,” he said, indicating the much slimmer document.

“I think it’s readily apparent there is a big difference between the president’s budget, which I hold in my hands, and what Sen. Sessions has presented as being the president’s budget. This is not the president’s budget. So, of course, we’re not going to support it. It’s not what the president proposed.”

The White House official said the Sessions and Mulvaney’s bills were mere GOP stunts to get Democrats on record opposing ‘the President’s budget’” as well as distracting from what the House Republican budget would do, which the official described as “protect(ing) massive tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires while making the middle class and seniors pay.”

How the aging of America is hurting the Republican Party"Even beyond the Ryan plan, the Tea Party championed causes dear to the hearts of retirees and near-retirees. Remember, the issue that launched the Tea Party in the summer of 2009 was…opposition to Medicare cuts for current beneficiaries. That’s a strange rallying cry for a purportedly limited government movement. Once you begin to think of the Tea Party as a vehicle for advancing the economic interests of the old against the young, though, a lot of otherwise mysterious behaviors suddenly begin to make sense."http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/...

TEA party: Leave the old people's contributions alone --and don't touch the NEXT generations EARNED and contributed to funds either!

(TSM wrote: Obama is the prodigy of Liberal Parents!! This president wouldn’t know the Truth if it Slap Him in the Face!!}

Terribly Stupid Mofo say what? By "prodigy" I suppose you meant progeny and by "it slap him in the face" you meant...well, something that would have made sense. Obama is the POTUS. The Grumpy Old Pricks are losers. Live with it...or at least stop whining in gibberish.

They say California is the Trend Setter… California Weighs Redefining Who Qualifies as a 'Doctor' to Cope with Obamacare's Shortages, Florida follows!! Donna Brazile ‘why did my Health Care premiums go up!’Liberals today complaining about Voter Suppression just think when Obamacare is fully implemented in 2014; Liberals will be in the Streets complaining about the like of access to Doctors blaming Republicans for another Fail Liberal Idea!!

LOL.. You're still alone, sick and old, but happy. We never realized how boring your life is until someone asks what you do for fun. Sometimes in the winds of change one finds their crayons and making an idiot of yourself.

Democrats have defended President Obama's budget initiatives, but voted "no" in unison last month when Republicans’ brought the president's plan to the floor last month. Democrats said Republicans were trying to embarrass Democrats by putting out his topline tax and spending numbers on the floor, but failed to specify the policies behind them.

The proposal, which was defeated 414-0, was introduced by U.S. Rep. Mick Mulvaney, a South Carolina Republican.

“The Mulvaney budget was supposedly based on President Obama’s budget, but it really wasn’t,” said U.S. Rep. Brad Miller, a Raleigh Democrat.“President Obama publicly urged that Democratic members vote against the Mulvaney budget as an impostor.”

Miller said the Mulvaney amendment would allow tax increases on the middle class, which the Obama budget does not.

Republicans charged Democrats with being afraid to vote for Obama's proposed tax increases and extra spending. Mulvaney said his amendment was no gimmick, but a nonpartisan analysis of the budget.

Andrew High, a spokesman for U.S. Rep. David Price, a Chapel Hill Democrat, said Republicans are looking to distract voters from their own budget proposals that give tax breaks to the wealthiest Americans.

“This amendment was not the President’s full budget; in fact it’s barely even a spoof of the President’s budget,” High said.“Even if it were, no matter the majority party, Congress never accepts a President’s budget request without changing a word.”

so here's some more right wing propaganda.Has Obama finally broken the GOP’s will?Did Obama’s re-election break what was left of Republican will?Consider some recent events. Republicans raised taxes in the fiscal cliff deal, and now, Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell has pushed through a tax increase to pay for a new transportation bill.Virginia GOP Rep. Scott Rigell will travel with Obama to Newport News Shipbuilding, where the president will warn of job losses associated with sequester cuts.Republican Governors like Rick Scott and (reportedly) Chris Christie are accepting ObamaCare’s Medicaid expansion.Meanwhile, Chuck Hagel is on the verge of being the Secretary of Defense, prominent Republicans are signing up to support gay marriage, and Obama is set to meet with Sens. McCain and Graham about immigration reform.They were once so defiant.Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2013/02/26/has-obama-f...oops. sorry. not propaganda.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Add your comments below

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite.
Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.